dutchman
Well-Known Member
It is for some of us! :emoji_stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
Women's World Cup 2019 (39 Viewers)
- Thread starter Gazolba
- Start date
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
It is for me, because once England are out, I support the USA.
Same goes for the men's, although the USA are usually out even before England in that.
Covstu
Well-Known Member
Why is that, assume you are actually American?
Covstu
Well-Known Member
Also what gets me (nearly put this in the annoying thread) that no one can criticise the ladies team. Seems okay to rip in to the men but not the ladies. Personally I don’t like needless slagging off without a valid reason but it seems that you cannot say anything such as the poor penalty, poor passing, possession etc without public uproar!
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Yeah, they say you're being sexist by doing it whereas in fact they're the sexist ones by expecting me to react differently to the women. With the men I'd be screaming "you're shit!" at them for a misplaced pass, not saying "never mind - it's OK"
I'm all for equality but that means taking the shit bits of being a bloke along with the good.
I'm all for equality but that means taking the shit bits of being a bloke along with the good.
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
No, I'm English, born in Coventry but I've lived in the USA longer than I lived in England.
I was married to an American (but no longer). I have two American daughters.
If England and the USA are in any competition, I support England.
But once England are out, I support the USA.
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
I don't have any problem with people criticising the quality of women in any sport.
Personally, I think NOT criticising them is sexist, because it implies they aren't tough enough to take criticism.
What I don't like is when people say they won't watch it just because it's women.
Or, when they compare men with women as though they should play exactly the same.
Someone earlier in this thread made a blanket statement that women goal-keepers are awful.
Well obviously they didn't watch some of the games I've watched.
I've seen several top class saves and no lack of bravery with women goal-keepers diving at the feet of strikers.
Covstu
Well-Known Member
Exactly, i enjoyed a lot of the games but you have to stop comparing to the men’s game however you can still discuss good and bad points of the game. I remember the game for the Olympics at the Ricoh and England were piss poor, couldn’t string two passes together, the game has come on leaps and bounds.
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
What we lack in England (and a lot of Europe, tbf) is a generation of women who have grown up with football as a major women's sport, as they have in the USA. Girls play "sahccer" from an early age because most other team sports are very male-dominated (I'm not aware of women's basketball, baseball, ice hockey or gridiron leagues, certainly not at a high level), and that is all they know - and their technical know-how shows as a result.
We don't have that yet, but with the increased publicity it's getting over here now, especially with the relative success in the World Cup, it will come. What the WSL clubs need to avoid is (if you'll forgive the phrase) spunking all their cash on expensive overseas "stars" which means that home-grown talent will be overlooked. That's the problem with the men's game too, don't forget.
It's kinda weird/refreshing to hear American women using what you might call English footy vernacular (like the terms "keeper" and "two-nil" - you never hear the word nil in any other US sport). Just like we were chatting about it in the pub.
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
In the US they do have professional women's basketball and it's a prettty big sport (it is televised). Though 90% of the players are African-American, just like men's basketball. In the US, sports are definitely seen as 'white' sports or 'black' sports. Not to say there isn't some overlap. But it's unusual to see a white basketball player or a black ice-hockey player. American football and soccer are more integrated. The most popular women's sports are basketball, volleyball, soccer and softball (like baseball except pitches are underhand instead of overhand). There's also professional women's ice-hockey but I think that is fairly recent and is only in the northern states.
Last edited:
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
Thanks G. But do you agree with my point about soccer being in American girls' psyche for much longer than in UK/Europe?
Covstu
Well-Known Member
Agree it’s a cultural thing. I think wider than the teams ability it’s where the fan base is coming from. For me they need to double up with the men’s game rather than go toe to toe, maybe after premier league games. Appreciate it will keep them in the shadow but will get more regularly out there
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
Just watched the ENG-SWE 3rd place play-off, and holy shit, if those are the third and fourth best teams in the WORLD, i won't be watching for another 10 years until the women's game gets better. The quality of football was atrocious! There is no way we'd put up with that if the Sky Blues played as badly.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I think there is a political correctness that is trying to force people to like it and if you say it’s dross you are some kind of caveman
Compared to men’s football it’s like if you’ve eaten in Michelin starred restaurants all your life and then you were sent to the Parsons Nose and accused of snobbery when you said it’s shite
Compared to men’s football it’s like if you’ve eaten in Michelin starred restaurants all your life and then you were sent to the Parsons Nose and accused of snobbery when you said it’s shite
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
The 3rd place game was an anti-climax.
Sweden won it in the first 25 minutes due to atrocious defending by England.
Defender clears the ball directly to a Swedish player who promptly sticks it in the net.
(Note: I've seen plenty of male defenders do the same)
Great goal by Fran Kirby to make it 1-2.
That miss by Beth Mead was the worst, must have been less than 5 yards with just the GK to beat but she put it wide. GK didn't need to make a save.
Yet another disallowed goal (fantastic strikers goal) by Ellen White per VAR.
Then even though we dominated the last 30 minutes, there were so many bad decisions in the final third.
Even so, it took a brilliant header off the line by a Swedish defender to deny Lucy Bronze an equaliser.
I don't think the game was as bad as previous posters have said. I've seen CCFC play far far worse.
At least we have Sunday's final to look forward to. It should be a cracking game.
Sweden won it in the first 25 minutes due to atrocious defending by England.
Defender clears the ball directly to a Swedish player who promptly sticks it in the net.
(Note: I've seen plenty of male defenders do the same)
Great goal by Fran Kirby to make it 1-2.
That miss by Beth Mead was the worst, must have been less than 5 yards with just the GK to beat but she put it wide. GK didn't need to make a save.
Yet another disallowed goal (fantastic strikers goal) by Ellen White per VAR.
Then even though we dominated the last 30 minutes, there were so many bad decisions in the final third.
Even so, it took a brilliant header off the line by a Swedish defender to deny Lucy Bronze an equaliser.
I don't think the game was as bad as previous posters have said. I've seen CCFC play far far worse.
At least we have Sunday's final to look forward to. It should be a cracking game.
dutchman
Well-Known Member
Well, some of us do! :emoji_stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
I'm supporting the USA, so I'm looking forward to it.
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
I can't look at her without thinking 'if only she had her nose fixed'.
Half-time analysis:
This is the first USA game where they haven't scored in the first 15 minutes.
The Dutch have their tactics spot on.
They have neutralised Tobin Heath and to a lesser extent Megan Rapinoe, which are the USA's two big threats.
The Dutch goal-keeper seems extremely competent.
Too many long balls from the USA.
All that said, the USA still look dangerouus and the Netherlands have been almost non-existent as an attacking force.
I still expect the USA to win but the Dutch could nick it 1-0 or force extra time and win on penalties.
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
Well in the end it was a pretty comfortable victory for the USA.
In fact, it could have and probably should have been 3-0 or 4-0.
The Netherlands looked pretty good when they threw people forward but then they became very vulnerable at the back.
The USA were clear through on goal two or three times and maybe because they were already 2-0 up, they fluffed those opportunities.
I think player for player the US were superior to every other team in the tournament.
England gave them their hardest and closest game and but for the missed penalty could have taken them to extra time.
I watched most of the games and thoroughly enjoyed the whole tournament.
In fact, it could have and probably should have been 3-0 or 4-0.
The Netherlands looked pretty good when they threw people forward but then they became very vulnerable at the back.
The USA were clear through on goal two or three times and maybe because they were already 2-0 up, they fluffed those opportunities.
I think player for player the US were superior to every other team in the tournament.
England gave them their hardest and closest game and but for the missed penalty could have taken them to extra time.
I watched most of the games and thoroughly enjoyed the whole tournament.
Last edited:
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
In case you missed this fantasic tournament, there are some video highlights of the final and semi-finals, and maybe other games too (I didn't check) on FIFA's site.
FIFA Women's World Cup France 2019™ - FIFA.com
FIFA Women's World Cup France 2019™ - FIFA.com
dutchman
Well-Known Member
Sweden’s Kosovare Asllani: ‘30,000 people came to celebrate our medal’
Sweden’s Kosovare Asllani has a very different view of the Women’s World Cup third-place match to Phil Neville, who labelled it a “nonsense” game, and it is fair to say that plenty of her compatriots agree with her. When the Sweden team returned from the victory over England that secured a bronze medal they were greeted by 30,000 fans in Gothenburg.
“A sign of a nation that is proud of us,” says Asllani, the midfielder who scored her country’s opening goals against Chile and England. The staggering reception came as a pleasant surprise to a squad not wholly aware of the momentum building back home during their run to the semi-finals.
“It’s always hard to know because you’re kind of in your own world,” Asllani says. “You’re just preparing for the next training, next game. Obviously we heard a little bit that people are like going crazy in Sweden and really watching the football in all sports bars and outdoors and we just felt like the whole country was behind us. We had our prime minister at two of our games, our prince came.
“Having 30,000 looking so happy and proud and just celebrating our medal … it’s not only our medal, we feel like the medal belongs to the whole nation and the next generation, all the young girls that really, really looked up to us and have us as role models because that’s what it’s all about and hopefully will get more girls to start playing football.”
Sweden’s Kosovare Asllani has a very different view of the Women’s World Cup third-place match to Phil Neville, who labelled it a “nonsense” game, and it is fair to say that plenty of her compatriots agree with her. When the Sweden team returned from the victory over England that secured a bronze medal they were greeted by 30,000 fans in Gothenburg.
“A sign of a nation that is proud of us,” says Asllani, the midfielder who scored her country’s opening goals against Chile and England. The staggering reception came as a pleasant surprise to a squad not wholly aware of the momentum building back home during their run to the semi-finals.
“It’s always hard to know because you’re kind of in your own world,” Asllani says. “You’re just preparing for the next training, next game. Obviously we heard a little bit that people are like going crazy in Sweden and really watching the football in all sports bars and outdoors and we just felt like the whole country was behind us. We had our prime minister at two of our games, our prince came.
“Having 30,000 looking so happy and proud and just celebrating our medal … it’s not only our medal, we feel like the medal belongs to the whole nation and the next generation, all the young girls that really, really looked up to us and have us as role models because that’s what it’s all about and hopefully will get more girls to start playing football.”
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
US women's team have had their case for equal pay thrown out before it even got to court.
Turns out that they were offered the same deal as the mens team but turned it down and that over the period in question got paid more than the mens team. You'd think that would be the sort of thing you'd check before taking legal action!
Turns out that they were offered the same deal as the mens team but turned it down and that over the period in question got paid more than the mens team. You'd think that would be the sort of thing you'd check before taking legal action!
oscillatewildly
Well-Known Member
But they do it for the love of the (inferior) game.
Johnnythespider
Well-Known Member
Who are they seeking equality with when not all players at a club are paid the same amount, do they want parity with the lowest earner or the highest.
tisza
Well-Known Member
just international appearance money and bonuses isn't it?
Men's club game bigger than women's in US. only 9 professional women's teams in US , average attendances around 5-6k mark
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately, they based their case on a non-typical period of time.
The men's team failed to qualify for their last WC.
However, the women's team, won their WC.
So over the period of time covered, the women actually earned more.
But there were aspects of the case beyond just wages, so the case will still proceed to court.
It's not over yet.
And regardless of the court outcome, the USSF could still voluntarily give the women a better deal.
Last edited:
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
That's something they seemed to have missed when they launched their legal action. MLS had an attendance of 8,694,584 last year and is self sufficient, the Womens league (NWSL) had an attendance of 792,409 and is subsidised by US Soccer.
That funding for the Womens league is part of the collective bargaining agreement agreed by the players. If they had the same deal as the men the league wouldn't get that funding and salaries there would drop like a stone. Or, as has happened in other Womens leagues in the US, the league would collapse completely as the money wouldn't be there to make it viable.
They had to pick that period of time as its the only way they could claim the women's team generated more than the men since 2018 was the first time since 1986 the mens team didn't qualify for the World Cup.
Some of the other aspects have already been thrown out such as the complaint about playing on artificial pitches as US Soccer successfully showed that the women's games don't generate enough revenue to make it viable to lay turf over the artificial pitches as they do for mens games.
The remaining claims don't look great, can see them losing the lot when it goes to court.